Technology

59735 readers

2567 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

225

Wi-Fi sniffers strapped to drones—Mike Lindell’s odd plan to stop election fraud | Lindell wants to fly drones near polling places to monitor voting machines. (arstechnica.com)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

43 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Wi-Fi sniffers strapped to drones—Mike Lindell’s odd plan to stop election fraud | Lindell wants to fly drones near polling places to monitor voting machines.::Lindell wants to fly drones near polling places to monitor voting machines.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This will vary by state but most states use paper ballots which are counted by voting machine, but the ballots themselves are kept as a backup. This is how recounts happen in very close elections, but also notable that recounts are mostly a roll of the dice to see if enough human errors stack up in the right direction to change the outcome in favor of the otherwise losing candidate

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

the ballots themselves are kept as a backup Ideally they are transported and kept under watch by many different parties with a stake in the result. Is the backup watched until it's deemed no longer needed?

recounts are mostly a roll of the dice to see if enough human errors stack up All the different parties should be watching out for errors, a human error should be difficult to happen when many humans wanting their party's votes to be counted :s

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ideally they are transported and kept under watch by many different parties with a stake in the result. Is the backup watched until it’s deemed no longer needed?

My understanding based on what I remember hearing a family member who works the polls explain is that they are locked up, then transported by the manager of that poll to presumably the county clerk who then takes possession of them and again they are kept under lock and key. These paper ballots also have to match up with a separate ledger of voters and signatures from that polling place, so even if someone added or subtracted ballots in between it would be identified. They would have to replace the ballot, which I believe is also numbered so they'd have to also forge an identical ballot of the correct ballot number to replace it with.

All the different parties should be watching out for errors, a human error should be difficult to happen

My understanding of the process is they'll have two teams of people repeating eachother's work on sets of 50 ballots, verifying the ballot matches the ledger tallying the votes then check if their counts match for every batch of 50, if the two teams counts do not match they recount the batch of 50 until the two teams counts match. So miscounting and not catching it is difficult, but if you've got 200,000 ballots and you assume an error rate of 1/10000 that's potentially 200 votes that might flip due to pure human error. It's a roll of the dice for the candidate, but if you lost a key county by 75 votes then you've got decent odds of the recount changing the outcome of that county election

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Thanks for your explanation. A counting machine is still concerning but I'm a little less concerned now.